HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1562 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No./FIR No.630 of 2024 under Section 191(1) BNS (146 IPC), 191(2) BNS (147 IPC), 109 BNS (307 IPC), 140(1) BNS (364 IPC), 352 BNS (504 IPC), 351(3) BNS (506 IPC), Police Station PGI, District Lucknow. Heard Mohammad Taha Chishti, learned counsel the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the named accused persons, along with 12 unknown individuals, mercilessly assaulted the informant using lathis, dandas, sharp-edged weapons, and the butt of a pistol. Allegation of firing is also made on Divyanshu, the named co accused. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has duly explained the criminal history of one case in the bail application. It is further submitted that the name of the applicant does not find mention in the FIR, nor in the statement of the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses. The charge sheet has already been filed against the remaining co-accused persons. It is contended that only on the basis of the custodial confessional statement of the co-accused Amit Singh, a general role has been attributed to the applicant for the first time. The injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhijeet Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ajay Pratap Singh, Pragati Singh Ankit Pratap Singh @ Rudra Pratap Singh (Rudra Pratap Singh In Charge Sheet) .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application and submitted that the injured was brutally assaulted and has also sustained injuries on his skull. Learned A.G.A. has likewise opposed the bail application. Upon a query made by the Court, he submitted that injury Nos. 6, 8, and 10 have been kept under observation. Perused the record so also the injury report of the injured. The injuries received by the injured are extracted below:- "1) Incised wound 3cmX0.5cmXskin-deep present over right side of skull, about 09cm above front right ear, margin clear, bleeding present. 2) about 4cm middle from injury no-1 margins clear, bleeding present. Incised wound 2.5cmX0.5cmXskin-deep present over mid of skull, 3) Laceration 1.5cmX0.3cm over right side of skull, about 1cm below from injury number-1; bleeding is present. 4) Contused abrasion 2cmX1cm over occipital region of head about 8cm above from left ear, redness present. 5) Contusion 3cmX3cm over left perital region of skull, about 2 cm above from left ear. 6) Contusion 4cmX3cm over nose with complaint of bleeding. Injury kept under observation and referred for X-ray; redness present. 7) Abrasion 3cmX2cmover right side of face just below right eye; redness present. 8) Contusion 3cmX1cm over left elbow joint. Injury kept under observation and referred for X-ray. 9) Abrasion 1cmX5cm present over right side of back. 10) Complaint of pain over left side of chest with the complaint of dysprea. Injury kept under observation and referred for X-ray chest." Injury nos. 6,8 and 10 are under observation. The one named accused person along with 12 unknown persons are alleged to have brutally assaulted/beaten the injured. The injured could name the other accused as he is not supposed to know all of them. The offence under Section 109 BNS, read with the other offences, and considering the gravity of the allegations, it cannot be said that the case is of false implication or that the allegations have been made merely to malign the reputation of the applicant. Anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, intended to be exercised only in exceptional circumstances, where the Court is satisfied that the applicant has been falsely implicated or where no material exists to justify NABAIL No. 1562 of 2025 2 custodial interrogation. In the present case, having regard to the gravity of offence and the manner and mode in which it has been conducted so also the injury report of the injured, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for exercising the discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the applicant. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. The investigating officer of this case is directed to conduct test identification parade of the accused persons. October 28, 2025/Madhu D.R/P.S NABAIL No. 1562 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench